Southside Development
Restarting the old Southside Development thread
There's a pretty interesting new development in the April 7th Planning Commission packet: https://lansingmi.portal.civicclerk.com/event/8224/files/agenda/14909
From the agenda:
These aren't some fantastically high-quality buildings nor is the development trying to be some new-urbanist mecca, but I really like this project. Especially for its location. My biggest question is does it actually get built like these renderings because if so it'd be a quite cool little place. It's really worth checking out the rather extensive document included in the planning document, lots of renderings, elevations and more information.
Site Plan
Aerial
Apartment building
Townhouses
Barn
There's a pretty interesting new development in the April 7th Planning Commission packet: https://lansingmi.portal.civicclerk.com/event/8224/files/agenda/14909
From the agenda:
BACKGROUND:
Lovejoy Community Services, with the consent and support of the property owner, Pentecostal
Church of God in Christ, is proposing the split of the subject property to facilitate a planned unit
development that would result in 6 detached single-family homes, 18 attached single-family
rowhouse units, 40 attached multi-family rowhouse units, a 14-unit apartment building, a multi-
use community building, and accessory urban agricultural farm spaces and buildings.
These aren't some fantastically high-quality buildings nor is the development trying to be some new-urbanist mecca, but I really like this project. Especially for its location. My biggest question is does it actually get built like these renderings because if so it'd be a quite cool little place. It's really worth checking out the rather extensive document included in the planning document, lots of renderings, elevations and more information.
Site Plan
Aerial
Apartment building
Townhouses
Barn
Comments
My main thing was overall density - this will be the exact same density as the surrounding neighborhood, 6 units per acre, and S Catherine St. and Gibson St. literally dead end into the site for another subdivision that never came to be. If the property owner wanted to plat this tomorrow they could and it would look exactly the same as the neighborhood, they would have the exact same amount of people coming into the site while installing way more impervious surfaces and clear-cutting the site. Platted under current R-1 lot standards there could be 110 units, not 78. This at least takes care to limit site disturbance and rehabilitate a stream wetland and preserve as many trees as possible.
This area was all farmland until at least 1955 according to historic aerials, and platted and developed during the 1960s-1970s. It is not a historic woodland. It is like people cannot fathom a nuanced understanding of how their 'quiet, little neighborhood' came to be.
They are proposing to use mass timber, solar, lots of stormwater retention, and a lot of other cool low-impact components.
I am not personally super opposed to the architecture - I think they were going for a sorta Scandinavian thing. City staff will have some discussions about the building designs that don't quite meet zoning ordinance. I think they are open to making them a bit more traditional/vernacular looking.
The public comments were something else - nearly every negative speaker just raved about their quiet, idyllic, suburban neighborhood, then in the same breath stated there is already too much speeding, trash, and crime in the area and this would be the tipping point.
As @gbdinlansing said: "the people they fear being neighbors already live there". These residents would do well to understand the reality of where they currently live and how a new development like this can improve its image and in turn their property values.